Road Trip Problems: Just Get Mad… That Helps. 🙄

Patience is Cumbersome.

That pretty much sums up this entire episode in three words. As we resume our discussion of the road trip recently taken by the Secretary of Energy, Jennifer Granholm, the author of the NPR article, Camila Domonoske, makes her arguments for why non-Tesla EVs have a “road trip problem”.

First, she sees planning a road trip as cumbersome. Second, there is a lack of infrastructure, which contributes to the first point. Third, the chargers are not fast enough. And finally, the charging infrastructure is unreliable.

She’s not wrong, but there are several things to consider. We are in the infancy of EV adoption. It seems like we are farther along, but realistically, we are just a toddler attempting the first steps of a marathon long course. JD Powers says that worry about public charging is the number one reason people are hesitant to change to electric. It is a concern, but remember 90% of charging is done at home.

But Ms. Domonoske’s points are valid. We want to go when we want to go and we don’t want anything to slow us down. Look at it this way, walking requires rest breaks, horses need water, cars need to refuel, and EVs will need to charge. As technology advances, this argument will become smaller and smaller, but all forms of travel require us to interrupt our journey at some point. There aren’t enough fast, reliable charging ports available, but that is why there is such a push to build the infrastructure to support a mass fleet of EVs.

The bottom line is this is a process and it requires patience. “Patience is when you’re supposed to be mad, but you choose to understand.” I don’t know who said it, but no truer words have been spoken.

Road Trip Problems: Don’t You Know Who I Am?

Secretary of Energy, Jennifer Granholm, set out on a whistle stop tour of the south east to promote EVs and EV adoption recently. Embedded in her caravan was an NPR reporter, who, like Madame Secretary, is a long time EV owner. The four day trip covered several stops for town hall style meetings from Charlotte, North Carolina to Memphis, Tennessee. Everything was business as usual, until a local sheriff department outside of Atlanta was called…

Okay, those are the facts of the story and in this episode, we look at what happened. Basically an over-zealous staffer thought he would do Mrs. Granholm a favor and save a charging port for her by ICE-ing out other people waiting to charge. For us, though, the bigger story is a statement made by the reporter, Camila Domonoske; “EVs that aren’t Teslas have a road trip problem…” This is the setup for a longer exploration of this question on the next episode. Ms. Domonoske makes some valid points and offers topics for consideration.

On a side note, Brietbart had a very different take on the story. In fact, after we recorded, they had three articles by three different people on the same story. None of them were positive toward EVs, once again proving that EVs are very political and have become a hot-button buzzword to activate the fringes of both sides of the political spectrum. From a common sense perspective, EVs are very practical but there is a long way to go before they become the first choice for consumers without any coercion. We think EVs will stand on their own merit once the infrastructure is in place and people can see how practical they really are.

Those Taxing Questions That Keep Us Up at Night

At 9:30 AM, the meeting started. Brent was attending in person and I remotely from my kitchen. Unbeknownst to me, Brent was supposed to be in the first half and I was supposed to be in the second half of the day long informational session.

These things are typically conducted in a less than artful or entertaining way. After I realized the first half didn’t pertain to me, I excused myself and rejoined after the lunch break. Brent ducked out of the second session where the basis of this episode originated.

I found out a new $ .03 per kWh tax on public charging is coming to Kentucky and wondered what that really means for EV drivers in the state. At first glance, it is designed to offset revenue generated by the $ .28.7 per gallon fuel tax, but does it really?

Unfortunately, my first question (one that any American citizen should be asking on any governmental decision) was what partisan political angle may be hidden in the new law. For the sake of this discussion, let’s assume it is born of pure motives. I think it’s a shame that we have to look at everything through this lens, but healthy skepticism toward all sides of the political spectrum and the media at large has been shown necessary. It’s a fact of human nature that people, most often, will find ways to benefit themselves and what they hold sacred, especially those in power.

Setting that aside, my more practical questions are “does this make sense and how will it impact EV adoption?” In reality, I don’t think this will be the big economic windfall law makers are expecting. They really don’t understand the nature of EV ownership and are approaching this with “gas-pump mentality.” Mathematically the logic is sound but in practicality is flawed.

Another piece of information that came out of this meeting was about the recently proposed EPA rules. The EPA is now tasked with sorting through the millions of comments received during the feedback portion of their proposal and must return with a “modified ruling” that then will become law. The rules, regardless, will impact the reliability, safety, and affordability of electricity in America.

How will this impact EV adoption? Only time will tell, but with all legislation by agency, it’s subject to change with each election cycle.